After 2.9.7

[Boudewijn Rempt]

Hi,

We had a long discussion on #calligra yesterday, but I don't know whether
we came to any conclusion... There are a bunch of things we have to
consider before moving on after 2.9.7.

I think that the frameworks branch is now ready to be called 3.0. It's
obviously not ready to release to end users, but we should make it the
new master. But let's call it the frameworks branch for now.

I propose that we move all feature development (magnetic selection
tool, animation, LOD) to the frameworks branch or a branch branched off
frameworks at this point. From that point on, only bug fixes should
go into 2.9, and each bug fix should be individually forward-ported
to frameworks

The bigger question is, what are we going to do with the frameworks
branch itself and with our git repo, and with our community?

This is really hard for me, personally, to formulate, but the truth is,
now that I am sponsored to work on Krita, I cannot afford to spend time
on the rest of calligra if that doesn't directly benefit Krita. I cannot
refactor something in the libraries and then port sheets, because I feel
that would be a misuse of the money the community has donated.

With the merging of the mvc branch, I already ran into that, and found 
that I just couldn't find the hours of the day to work on sheets, stage
and the rest. And apparently, nobody else could find the time.

For the frameworks branch, I do want to do a big cleanup. I want to make
building krita much easier, and that means cutting down on dependencies,
cutting down on code in libraries that krita doesn't need. On the other
hand, if I were the words maintainer, I would like to get rid of stuff
that words doesn't need, like pigment.

Originally, I envisaged our split up repo like:

calligra-libs 
calligra-apps
calligra-plugins
krita
kexi

Or even split up calligra-libs into a set of repos: that would help with
the dependency graph in Linux distributions, where they now make marble
and mysql dependencies of Krita...

But in the discussion yesterday, I think we came to a sort of tentative
conclusion that it doesn't make sense to push all our libraries into
separate repositories, and that it even doesn't make sense to create a
separate calligra-libs.git that could be used by the applications.

I am not sure how much of the calligra libs are used by Kexi, and whether
sharing the same libraries between Kexi and the office applications makes
sense. Should kexi go into its own repo?

For Krita, and I hate to say this, it probably makes sense to fork our
shared libraries. The office-apps maintainers can then strip out all the
krita-specific stuff, and for Krita, we can strip out the stuff that only
makes sense for office applications.

I also think that it makes sense for Krita to integrate the karbon plugins
and tools, and maybe the karbon filters. I honestly don't see any future
for karbon as a separate application. You cannot build a good vector drawing
application without a dedicated maintainer, and Karbon has been officially
unmaintained since April 2013 already.

I'm not really happy writing this mail... But anyway, back to practical 
issues. I'd like to start taking steps next week already.

* split up our git repo whichever we we like
* ask sysadmin to put our repos up
* update all the build documentation on community.kde.org to talk
about kf5 and the new repo locations
* update the information on our websites (not forgetting kde.org)
* ping David Revoy about updating his build guide
* figure out the release process after the split?

And then start hacking... Thoughts? Flames?

Boudewijn